Some guy uploaded darknet version of a popular book to the Kindle store.
Amazon finds out about it, pulls the book and issues a refund to everybody who bought it.
People complain that Amazon pulled the book and that they deserve to keep it? Or even stranger think that they deserve a free paper copy for their inconvenience?

It's not big brother to have a feature that can delete a file that you purchased from them that wasn't authorized (like what currently happened) or you didn't pay for (like that guy who complained that the files he had delivered with an expired credit card were removed). They aren't reading what you have on your Kindle and deleting various warez you have on your reader.

If you really want to read these books so bad and you don't care about Ayn Rand getting any money, just pirate them.

- edit And it's funny how most of the people who are getting their panties in a bunch don't own Kindles. PRS-505 owners going "glad I don't have whispernet now"

Some guy uploaded darknet version of a popular book to the Kindle store.
Amazon finds out about it, pulls the book and issues a refund to everybody who bought it.
People complain that Amazon pulled the book and that they deserve to keep it? Or even stranger think that they deserve a free paper copy for their inconvenience?

It's not big brother to have a feature that can delete a file that you purchased from them that wasn't authorized (like what currently happened) or you didn't pay for (like that guy who complained that the files he had delivered with an expired credit card were removed). They aren't reading what you have on your Kindle and deleting various warez you have on your reader.

If you really want to read these books so bad and you don't care about Ayn Rand getting any money, just pirate them.

- edit And it's funny how most of the people who are getting their panties in a bunch don't own Kindles. PRS-505 owners going "glad I don't have whispernet now"

You're certainly entitled to this opinion, but others will disagree. I personally would be disturbed that a company can control my access to reading material.

And I don't see what the ownership of a certain brand of reader has to do with anything. I used to own a Kindle, now I don't. That shouldn't mean I'm not entitled to voice my opinion on any thread.

Whether Amazon should or shouldn't rectify this situation in the manner it did - wouldn't they be in for a big, fat lawsuit if they did not? Aren't publishing & disribution laws some of the most strident of all?

BTW, this isn't an opinion - just asking about the legal ramifications.

Whether Amazon should or shouldn't rectify this situation in the manner it did - wouldn't they be in for a big, fat lawsuit if they did not? Aren't publishing & disribution laws some of the most strident of all?

BTW, this isn't an opinion - just asking about the legal ramifications.

Yes - but what people are objecting to - is Amazon entering their property - we DO own our Kindles, if not their content - and removing the pirated book.
Sort of electronic "breaking & entering" - as if police broke down your door to remove an item that was stolen, that you had bought in good faith at a reputable store - without asking your permission to enter your premises.

Yes - but what people are objecting to - is Amazon entering their property - we DO own our Kindles, if not their content - and removing the pirated book.
Sort of electronic "breaking & entering" - as if police broke down your door to remove an item that was stolen, that you had bought in good faith at a reputable store - without asking your permission to enter your premises.

yes, that's what I find disconcerting about this. I wonder what they're doing about the folks who bought the book but never turn on whispernet?

Yes - but what people are objecting to - is Amazon entering their property - we DO own our Kindles, if not their content - and removing the pirated book.
Sort of electronic "breaking & entering" - as if police broke down your door to remove an item that was stolen, that you had bought in good faith at a reputable store - without asking your permission to enter your premises.

I understand that and agree, partly. To me, the Kindle hardware is mine, but the content is between a purchase and a lease. But that wasn't my question. What I would like to know is what would the consequences be for Amazon if they did not do what they did? Isn't this similar to "owning" stolen property? What would the police do? Let you keep it?

Someone would have to file suit before there were legal ramifications. Generally a "cease and desist" letter is all that happens. And with a c&d there are no penalties (generally speaking, of course there are exceptions)

Whoo, Ayn Rand! Remember kids, always strip the DRM from your files and back them up on your computer! Now you know and knowing if half the battle.

Does anyone know how Amazon identifies the files on your Kindle? Is there something in the DRM that identifies it for Amazon? Or will they only pull DRMed files? It shouldn't be the metadata because someone could have a book listed at Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and it might just be a document the reader made from online SparkNotes or something.

Someone would have to file suit before there were legal ramifications. Generally a "cease and desist" letter is all that happens. And with a c&d there are no penalties (generally speaking, of course there are exceptions)

I can understand them wanting to avoid being open for a suit, though. They're a big target and, even if they win, fighting these things is expensive. I was also curious about the same thing as F1: If they have the means to remove the book and choose not to, does that leave them more vulnerable. I am no legal scholar but it seems likely to me it could. Maybe the liability for the Ayn Rand books wouldn't be so big but quite a few copies of the Harry Potter books were downloaded and we know their author is not timid about using the legal hammer. It makes sense with this potential out there to have a policy of doing everything in your power to minimize damage.

Still, I think a good solution here would be better screening for the self-publishing submissions. It would be hard to catch absolutely everything amiss but I bet you could catch the vast majority with automation. If they search on the author or title and find them in their print catalog, that's a big tip off right there. There are certainly more intensive things they could do that would cast a wider net, but that's some low hanging fruit.

In which case Amazon should be held liable for any damages done to the publishers and heirs of the works in dispute. That does not give them the right to log onto their customers private property and delete any files.

It does not give them the right to delete any files... that you procure through other sources, e.g. public domain.

However, if you purchase it through the Kindle Store, you have not purchased tangible property, you are licensing content. "Provision of content" is a service, not a tangible good. As far as I can tell, they are within their rights to revoke that license.

Since there aren't thousands of complaints about deleted Harry Potter books (and, it seems, Amazon isn't even aware of books on your Kindle unless you receive them via the Kindle Store), I believe Amazon will only police their own licensed content.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wodin

Just because I bought a computer (which I have) from Amazon, does that give them license to remote into it and delete any files they want? I think not!

Correct. But that is not what Amazon has done. They have revoked access to improperly licensed content for which they are responsible.

It's more like the cable company turning off specific signals if they figure out that you're receiving channels you haven't paid for. Or, Blizzard removing a virtual weapon from your World of Warcraft player because the admins realized it's too powerful.

Or, like having a Rhapsody subscription, filling your portable music player with subscription content, and then losing access to that content when you cancel the subscription.

Quote:

Originally Posted by poohbear_nc

Sort of electronic "breaking & entering" - as if police broke down your door to remove an item that was stolen, that you had bought in good faith at a reputable store - without asking your permission to enter your premises.

...except that you are constantly inviting them into your premises, letting them fix and change and update your device, and storing your stuff at their property to boot. And again, your access to an e-book is actually a service and a license, not a tangible object. I.e. the metaphor, while understandable and based on previous scenarios, is slightly flawed.

Again, distaste for the approach is reasonable, and I think Amazon would be wise to make this more explicit in the TOS. If you don't like it, though, don't buy a Kindle -- or any other device that has an integrated store, including the iPhone (as Apple can remotely disable apps). There is, and will be for the foreseeable future, plenty of alternatives.

Does anyone know how Amazon identifies the files on your Kindle? Is there something in the DRM that identifies it for Amazon? Or will they only pull DRMed files? It shouldn't be the metadata because someone could have a book listed at Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and it might just be a document the reader made from online SparkNotes or something.

Mobipocket format books have a unique identifier embedded in them. It would be easy enough to search books for that identifier.